for Bigfoot, Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and More

The Finding Bigfoot team travels to an apple orchard in Vermont to investigate a photo of what may be a sasquatch carrying her baby. With reports throughout the Adirondack Corridor, they take to the forest in hopes of finding evidence themselves.

Post navigation

I can’t believe they’re wasting an episode on this. That’s obviously a dude in a ghillie suit, probably leaving the woods after an evening of deer or bear hunting. I’d rather see them do an episode examing the Myakka Ape footage.

What Myakka Ape footage? Are you talking about the Florida photos, or something I missed? Those photos, to me, look like a very two-dimensional image. Like a painting, or some such. Totally flat-looking. If there’s footage, can someone post a link?

The problem is that the more mainstream Bigfoot gets with shows like Finding Bigfoot, you’re going to get more and more idiots out there trying to create hoaxes to generate some fame for themselves.

Honestly, at this point I refuse to believe pretty much everything as a report is quite easy to fabricate and every photo/video that shows up is blurry, distant or some other reason why it’s a “blobsquatch”. Right now, the only thing that would prove it to me is a verified body.

Referring to that as the hand of an infant sasquatch is a VERY long “reach.” Aside from that it is clearly someone in a ghillie suit bending over. Just look at how the material hangs from the head area almost like a hood. The proporations of the shoulders are also far too small in frame for an adult sasquatch. But hey…this show stopped being about actually finding a bigfoot a long time ago. Now its all about money and ratings for the BFRO/Animal Planet.

I want to talk about this show and what an embarrassment to the community it’s turned out to be in my opinion. It’s not even entertaining anymore. Epic fail, Meister Moneymaker. You are a greenback-grubbing disgrace, in my opinion. There, I called you out, you phony!!

Guess the District of Columbia must be next.
They may not find bigfoot but are certain to find plenty of bigmouths roaming around.
“If bigmouths exist,” says Matt to the camera, “how can science continue to deny the existence of bigfeet?”

The Producer Keith Hoffman expressed on a show how he was all about the “drama” so I no longer blame Matt and his team for the faked evidence, recreated howls, thermal hits of horses previewed as possible bigfoot, footprints found by producers then filmed showing Cliff “acting” as if he had found them, etc, etc, etc…that is the work of Keith Hoffman and his team of producers.

Well, Hoffman knows how to hype a show. He gets 1.3 million people to watch, and never shows them a thing

All this season’s shows are done already, filmed months ago. If Matt and his team had found ANYTHING, he owes it to his loyal 1.3 million viewers to let them see SOMETHING, I mean ANYTHING, in the way of proof or evidence Bigfoot exists.

Keith Hoffman may be pulling the strings on this show, but Matt Moneymaker is the face of Finding Bigfoot, and if he continues to find NOTHING, he should at least be man enough to admit that maybe these animals do not exist.

Finding Bigfoot has become a Circus Sideshow with people standing in line to see. Like the Circus, Finding Bigfoot has to move from town to town because staying in one place too long, people will begin to see, there really is NOTHING to see on Finding Bigfoot

I do not watch that show. So I do not know what answer they came up with as being the subject in the photograph. However, it could be just about anything. I do have a guess though and it is not Bigfoot with a baby Bigfoot.

My guess is that what we see in the photograph, is the North American Barred Owl. We are seeing the owl from behind as it swoops down on prey in front of the camera. It is coming in from the right side of the photo with left wing showing to the camera center at about a 30 degree angle. The supposed Bigfoot’s head is the left wing where it attacheds to the owl’s body. I can see what looks like an owl’s head at the top of the subject. I can see symmetry for what I identify wings at the side of the subject. I even see the tail at the bottom.

What people are proclaiming is a baby Bigfoot is actually whatever small prey animal the owl just got in it’s talons. I can even see the white mottled pattern of the owl’s feathers. What we are seeing is some fur but that is only of the prey animal the owl is grappling with. The rest of the fur is really feathers which motion blur will always make into what looks like fur. The bigger white spots or “missing fur” is simply the white pattern of the barred owl that has remained still enough with movement to give off a definitive white patch. Why don’t we see the rest of the white blotch pattern of feathers. Well, with motion blur, any small white area will be deleted out by the blur of the darker colors. It is that simple.

My question is: Are there barred owls in the surrounding geography where this still was taken. If the answer is yes, it is most certainly a barred owl and not a Bigfoot. It looks big because it is not on the ground, still airbourne and close to the camera lens.

Again, sometimes the most likely answer or easy answer is the correct answer. It is a barred owl, swooping down on it’s prey. That is what we are looking at folks.

If barred owls are not found in that area, then I am wrong. If they are found in that area, then I am correct.

The whole Finding Bigfoot exercise is disappointing and hugely entertaining. They were so close to getting this one right and missed. It was like watching a sports team loose a close game.

At some point, Cliff posited that the figure in the picture could look larger than it is because it is closer to the camera. At another point, Cliff realized that when Bobo was a stand in for the thing in the picture his feet were clearly visible; bot no feet could be seen in the picture. Then, at least twice during the night “investigations” they heard barred owls. They were so close to the answer! There are local owls, the camera was up a tree, we are seeing the back of something close to the camera, possible with its feet tucked up against it. It’s an owl or another bird with its wings partially extended and head down at the top of the picture. Granted, I don’t know what that apparent hand is, but I don’t think it refutes the rest of it.

The bigger issue for the show is that everyone seems so willing to believe that everything is a bigfoot without any supporting evidence. There is no reason to believe that the older woman who saw a roadside bigfoot saw anything unusual. Eyewitness testimony in tough enough and when you combine that with America’s overwhelming desire to be on television, these stories are close to meaningless. A “knock” in the woods without video of a bigfoot whacking a tree does not make it a communicative gesture. I can’t stand the fact that Cliff opines on what is “common” bigfoot behavior when there is not a single documented example of bigfoot behavior (with the possible of exception of walking away from Patterson & Gimlin). How does he know that bigfoot are “crack shots” when hurling rocks as deer? How does he even know they eat deer? Why do these guys think they know when and how to make obnoxiously loud vocalizations? Do Matt and Bob really believe they were passed in the woods by a team of bigfoot driving deer to the pond? Their evidence for that is some thumps and cracks they heard in the pitch black. Funny that your thermal cameras did not see any of that activity.

I used to have a special respect for Ranae who was, I believe, supposed to be the voice of reason and actual field experience. She should really make these guys support all the crazy knowledge they claim to possess about how bigfoot are supposed to behave. While she still questions the big conclusions, she should explain to the audience why holding a rave in the woods does or does not make sense, whether it is more likely that a large primate might be diurnal or nocturnal, what it might eat, and how that informs real field work. I feel like she has dropped the ball on bringing conflict and drama to the show through just a little bit of actual science.

But, I continue to watch. I have fun arguing with the television. In particular, I enjoy watching with my 11 year old boy and stopping the show whenever someone makes a wildly unsupported assertion about these alleged creatures. We talk about the logical fallacies involved and then move on. We do not criticize the witnesses who are, I think, generally relaying what they believe happened. But, we relentlessly dissect what the “researchers” have to say. Starting with Matt’s assertion that he has tracked bigfoot for 25 years and ending with “And . . . he still can’t find one.” If you want science, this is not the place to look for it. For entertainment, I will keep watching.

This is not the first time they misidentified a bird for a sasquatch on a trailcam. Remember that Kentucky episode? Fact or Faked clearly proved it was a bird landing to pick up seeds. Did anybody else notice the elderly women got to play herself in this recreation…except the animated sasquatch was 5 yards away from her car versus over 100 yards where Bobo stood? I used to have a lot of respect for the BFRO when they were just a mysterious website. This show has destroyed their credibility.